Absolutely. Technology will lead us to post-scarcity.
If there's poverty in post-scarcity, it's society causing it by artificial limitations of goods/services.
Topic: Can Technology Help Eradicate Poverty? (Read 1073 times)
Yes, of course. There are a lot of researchers that indicate how technology can help poverty. One of the examples is Fintech that may help Unbanked Population (people who don't have enough money for banking). More about this problem you can find out here: https://www.cyberius.com/how-can-fintech-help-the-unbanked-infographic/
Found this interesting article discussing how augmented reality games can foster empathy. It reports,
“Current research suggests that virtual environments have a heightened capacity to inspire empathy via embodiment of novel avatars (virtual bodies that do not resemble the user’s physical body). For example, when people took on the identity of a piece of acidifying coral in virtual reality, they were more likely to show empathy towards the ecosystem after the experience. These findings indicate an opportunity for AR games to positively impact users and communities. Carefully crafted augmented reality games can bring people together and inspire empathy, kindness and understanding.
Maybe this is what the world needs at these challenging times?
https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/24/augmented-reality-can-foster-empathy-and-games-can-take-advantage/
“Current research suggests that virtual environments have a heightened capacity to inspire empathy via embodiment of novel avatars (virtual bodies that do not resemble the user’s physical body). For example, when people took on the identity of a piece of acidifying coral in virtual reality, they were more likely to show empathy towards the ecosystem after the experience. These findings indicate an opportunity for AR games to positively impact users and communities. Carefully crafted augmented reality games can bring people together and inspire empathy, kindness and understanding.
Maybe this is what the world needs at these challenging times?
https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/24/augmented-reality-can-foster-empathy-and-games-can-take-advantage/
Somehow. For example, blockchain can help unbanked people, who haven't access to financial service. Fintech solution companies in different countries and the services they are offering to the unbanked. China, India, Pakistan, and Indonesia all have at least 1 or more fintech companies serving the unbanked population. If you want to find out more look at this Infographic; https://www.cyberius.com/how-can-fintech-help-the-unbanked-infographic/
It seems to me that this is quite possible, but only technologies should go very far. And so that people do not have to work!
Inclusive agriculture, rural growth and structural transformation from agriculture to high-productivity manufacturing and other economic sectors can be accelerated and it depends if those people will be able to learn this technology it can't help eradicate poverty if they have no knowledge.
depending on the sentiment and alignment of the government and officials to respond to this, because this relates to broad regulations and rules
Empathy can often be counter productive.
Look at wellfare.
Look at Africa.
We pour in billions and billions of voluntary donated $ into Africa to feed the people, and nothing is achieved since they aren't capable of producing their own items to make their own lives easier.
People need to take care of themselves.
Having empathy doesn't mean you're going to do something good, only that you're going to feel like you're doing something good.
Sometimes the harsh options are the best options for the people.
Look at wellfare.
Look at Africa.
We pour in billions and billions of voluntary donated $ into Africa to feed the people, and nothing is achieved since they aren't capable of producing their own items to make their own lives easier.
People need to take care of themselves.
Having empathy doesn't mean you're going to do something good, only that you're going to feel like you're doing something good.
Sometimes the harsh options are the best options for the people.
Teach a man to fish, indeed..
I don't think technology can help eradicate poverty. Now a days whole world is using robot in their factory for production. So poor people are loosing work. Yes we need technology but technology can't eradicate poverty.
No. it is only our selves that can uplift our state of human being not technology
But certainly technology can aid us in uplifting our lives, right? That fact you're able to post a comment here is because of technology. And this forum has proven to be very helpful in discovering new things, right?
Even indirectly, technology can aid in improving the welfare of society. For example, they say blockchain tech can help improve the voting process. This means no fraud and more people will get to vote. This can then lead to electing the right leaders who can create the best policies for society. They say digital currencies on the other hand, will eliminate corruption. So I guess in one way or another, technology can help enhance everyone's lives.
Technologies like virtual and augmented realities create experiences which can help generate empathy. Why? Because these experiences enable us humans to live in the shoes of others. Makes sense, right? This can foster understanding and compassion among leaders and policymakers, helping solve issues such as civil rights, social welfare and immigration, and therefore can be a solution to growth and equality.
What do you think?
What do you think?
It can if we implement such technologies properly in the world with well balance
I think so too. And there's always been a balance, I believe. Humans at the end of the day, will always have the choice when it comes to how and when to use these available technologies. But with recent developments in technology aimed at improving education, health and our financial system, I do believe it can enhance the lives of society.
Prosperity comes from hard work, not from technology.
Yeah I totally agree with you but technology with hard work can do miracles to reduce poverty
Technologies like virtual and augmented realities create experiences which can help generate empathy. Why? Because these experiences enable us humans to live in the shoes of others. Makes sense, right? This can foster understanding and compassion among leaders and policymakers, helping solve issues such as civil rights, social welfare and immigration, and therefore can be a solution to growth and equality.
What do you think?
What do you think?
It can if we implement such technologies properly in the world with well balance
I read other articles about how VR can be a tool for empathy. I believe some developers recently created experiences that allow users to understand immigration issues, or even witness events such as the Hiroshima bombing. Some say the technology helps us achieve equality. What do you think about that?
I even found a debate on whether tech is democratizing or not. There’s some interesting points raised there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SciFiRealism/comments/93fa8h/is_tech_democratizing_everything/
I even found a debate on whether tech is democratizing or not. There’s some interesting points raised there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SciFiRealism/comments/93fa8h/is_tech_democratizing_everything/
hard work and/or technology
Prosperity comes from hard work, not from technology.
...
That's an interesting comparison you make with beehives. Do you really think that the "leaders" are highly intelligent? Is that what it takes?
That's an interesting comparison you make with beehives. Do you really think that the "leaders" are highly intelligent? Is that what it takes?
As best I can determine, the closest thing we have to 'actual leaders' at this time are heirs to dynastic fortunes, most of which are built on exploitation of the modern debt-backed monetary systems. Some are intelligent and most are _very_ highly trained, but 'regression to the mean' takes it's toll. Inbreeding is sometimes a factor as well such was clearly evident in the European monarchies. These issues are more easily hidden now.
The obvious solution to the aforementioned problems is to retain promising people who are both highly intelligent AND have other psychological profile features which are useful. Guys like Jacob Schiff, Henry Kissinger, and Zbigniew Brzezinski for instance.
Most of the 'Scientists and Engineers' working on modern projects for the 'leaders' are among the highest in terms of native intellect, but at a third wrung or below on the power structure. Unfortunately for them, when their tasks have been accomplished they turn into a liability in the eyes of the real leaders. In some ways they are analogous to the military leaders of times past.
...
That's an interesting comparison you make with beehives. Do you really think that the "leaders" are highly intelligent? Is that what it takes?
That's an interesting comparison you make with beehives. Do you really think that the "leaders" are highly intelligent? Is that what it takes?
As best I can determine, the closest thing we have to 'actual leaders' at this time are heirs to dynastic fortunes, most of which are built on exploitation of the modern debt-backed monetary systems. Some are intelligent and most are _very_ highly trained, but 'regression to the mean' takes it's toll. Inbreeding is sometimes a factor as well such was clearly evident in the European monarchies. These issues are more easily hidden now.
The obvious solution to the aforementioned problems is to retain promising people who are both highly intelligent AND have other psychological profile features which are useful. Guys like Jacob Schiff, Henry Kissinger, and Zbigniew Brzezinski for instance.
Most of the 'Scientists and Engineers' working on modern projects for the 'leaders' are among the highest in terms of native intellect, but at a third wrung or below on the power structure. Unfortunately for them, when their tasks have been accomplished they turn into a liability in the eyes of the real leaders. In some ways they are analogous to the military leaders of times past.
I understand a lot of what you're saying, but I don't see the answer my question. Sorry, if I'm just missing it. You talk about new dictatorship in the form of technocracy. You said previously that the developed world has tamed poverty thanks to technology. How is this actually happening? How is the "technocracy" sharing the wealth somehow to make poor people more wealthy? I don't find that dictators are usually overly generous.
I think you may have gotten my comments confused with someone elses'. I also did not really seek to answer a question of yours. Mostly just to present my view on the realities of technology and society to contrast it with the standard marketing fluff.
Truthstreammedia did a little piece which is very eye-opening on where one of the leading technology corporations is wishing to take 'the hive'. They are not even trying to hide things at this point. Well worth watching:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ekkwAyNf1w
In a bee hive, the 99.99% have a 'good life' and are perfectly happy doing their thing. It may be collecting as much pollen as they can in the three weeks they have to live. Or it may be a suicide attack on a threat to the hive. Or joining a mass swarm in hopes of helping a new leader to exploit another resource even if 9 times out of ten the operation will be a failure and they will all die.
The .01% sit in the middle of the hive and control the activities through 'information' (transferred chemically through pheromones in this case.) They receive information from the hive in the same manner in order to make 'better' decisions.
Some highly intelligent people cannot help but be enchanted by the thought of the power of sitting at the center of the hive and directing it's activities. Perhaps most such people. Most of them will be convinced that when they get such power they will use it for good. Unfortunately most will find that they simply built a system for someone else to control.
That's an interesting comparison you make with beehives. Do you really think that the "leaders" are highly intelligent? Is that what it takes?
I understand a lot of what you're saying, but I don't see the answer my question. Sorry, if I'm just missing it. You talk about new dictatorship in the form of technocracy. You said previously that the developed world has tamed poverty thanks to technology. How is this actually happening? How is the "technocracy" sharing the wealth somehow to make poor people more wealthy? I don't find that dictators are usually overly generous.
I think you may have gotten my comments confused with someone elses'. I also did not really seek to answer a question of yours. Mostly just to present my view on the realities of technology and society to contrast it with the standard marketing fluff.
Truthstreammedia did a little piece which is very eye-opening on where one of the leading technology corporations is wishing to take 'the hive'. They are not even trying to hide things at this point. Well worth watching:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ekkwAyNf1w
In a bee hive, the 99.99% have a 'good life' and are perfectly happy doing their thing. It may be collecting as much pollen as they can in the three weeks they have to live. Or it may be a suicide attack on a threat to the hive. Or joining a mass swarm in hopes of helping a new leader to exploit another resource even if 9 times out of ten the operation will be a failure and they will all die.
The .01% sit in the middle of the hive and control the activities through 'information' (transferred chemically through pheromones in this case.) They receive information from the hive in the same manner in order to make 'better' decisions.
Some highly intelligent people cannot help but be enchanted by the thought of the power of sitting at the center of the hive and directing it's activities. Perhaps most such people. Most of them will be convinced that when they get such power they will use it for good. Unfortunately most will find that they simply built a system for someone else to control.
Jump to: